Application of ethical theories to issues of importance

Welcome to Your Guide on Ethical Applications!

In this chapter, we move from "what are the theories?" to "how do we actually use them?" We will explore two of the biggest topics in human history: War and Peace and Sexual Ethics. Don't worry if these topics feel heavy at first; we’ll break them down into simple steps and clear arguments that you can use in your exam.

Section 3.1: War and Peace

How do we decide if a war is "right"? Throughout history, religious and secular thinkers have tried to find a middle ground between "fighting for any reason" and "never fighting at all."

The Just War Theory

This is a set of rules designed to help decide if a war is morally acceptable. It was mainly developed by two key thinkers: St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. You can think of it as a "pre-flight checklist" for countries before they go to battle.

The theory is split into three parts:

1. Jus ad bellum (Justice before the war): Rules for whether it is right to start a war. Examples include having a Just Cause (like self-defense) and it being a Last Resort.

2. Jus in bello (Justice during the war): Rules for how to fight fairly. For example, Proportionality (don't use a nuclear bomb to settle a small border dispute) and Discrimination (only targeting soldiers, not innocent civilians).

3. Jus post bellum (Justice after the war): This is a newer addition. It focuses on how to end a war fairly, ensuring peace treaties are just and helping the defeated country rebuild.

Analogy: Imagine a school football match. Jus ad bellum is the reason for the game (is it a scheduled tournament or just a random fight?). Jus in bello is following the referee's rules during the match. Jus post bellum is shaking hands afterward and making sure the pitch is cleaned up.

Nuclear War

The invention of nuclear weapons changed everything. Many thinkers argue that a nuclear war can never be a "Just War" because it violates the rule of discrimination (it kills everyone, not just soldiers) and proportionality (the damage is far greater than any possible benefit).

Pacifism: The Choice for Peace

Pacifism is the belief that war and violence are always wrong. There are different "flavours" of pacifism you need to know:

• Absolute Pacifism: Violence is never acceptable, no matter what. Many Quakers hold this view.

• Relative (or Selective) Pacifism: You generally oppose war but might accept it in extreme, specific circumstances.

• Nuclear Pacifism: You might support a war fought with "normal" weapons, but you believe nuclear weapons are so evil they must never be used.

Quick Review: War and Peace

• Just War Theory aims to limit the damage of war, not encourage it.
• Key Thinkers: Augustine and Aquinas.
• Pacifism ranges from "never ever" (Absolute) to "not with nukes" (Nuclear).
• Common Mistake to Avoid: Don't just list the Just War criteria. You must evaluate them—do they actually work in the modern world of drones and cyber-attacks?

Section 3.2: Sexual Ethics

This section looks at how we make decisions about our most personal relationships. This is an area where society has changed very quickly, and religious views are often in tension with modern secular (non-religious) attitudes.

Changing Attitudes

In the past, most people in the UK followed traditional religious rules: sex was only for marriage, and adultery (cheating) or promiscuity (many partners) were seen as sinful. Today, things are different. Concepts like pre-marital sex, same-sex relationships, and civil partnerships are widely accepted by the law and the public.

Key Thinkers: Vardy and Dominian

You need to be able to talk about these two modern thinkers:

• Peter Vardy: He is often critical of how "casual" sex has become in modern society. He argues that if we treat sex as just a physical "transaction" without commitment, we lose the deep, spiritual value of the human person. He thinks the "sexual revolution" has led to people being used as objects.

• Jack Dominian: He was a Catholic psychiatrist who tried to modernise religious views. He argued that the most important thing is permanent, faithful love. He believed that even if a relationship isn't a traditional marriage, if it has the same qualities of love and commitment, it can still reflect God’s love.

Specific Issues to Apply

When you get an exam question, you will need to apply your ethical theories (like Natural Moral Law or Utilitarianism) to these issues:

• Same-sex Relationships: A Natural Moral Law thinker might say it's wrong because it can't lead to reproduction. A Situation Ethics thinker would say it’s fine as long as it is the "most loving" thing to do.

• Contraception: Religions are divided here. The Catholic Church traditionally opposes artificial contraception (seeing it as "unnatural"), while many other Christians see it as a responsible way to plan a family.

Did you know? The word "Agape" is key here. It’s the Greek word for "unconditional love." Many modern Christians argue that as long as a sexual relationship is based on Agape, it is ethically "good."

Quick Review: Sexual Ethics

• Secular views focus on consent and autonomy (your right to choose).
• Religious views often focus on purpose (is it for babies or bonding?) and sanctity.
• Peter Vardy warns against "devaluing" sex.
• Jack Dominian focuses on the power of committed love.

Final Memory Aid: The "Four C's" of Ethics Exams

When writing your essays, always check for the Four C's:

1. Criteria: What are the rules? (e.g., Just War criteria).
2. Context: What is the issue? (e.g., pre-marital sex).
3. Contributors: Who said what? (e.g., Aquinas or Dominian).
4. Conclusion: Which side is stronger and why?

You've got this! Application is all about practice. Try taking a news story about a conflict or a social change and ask yourself: "What would a Utilitarian say? What would a Natural Moral Law follower say?"